I feel so strongly that Mitt Romney is the right choice for president that I wanted to make one last post, my closing argument as it were, in hopes of convincing that one last undecided voter out there somewhere to vote for Mitt. I wanted to explain why I, and the other authors here at Mitt Romney Central, have devoted such time, effort, emotion, and yes, money, to the cause of electing Mitt. My list of specific reasons why I like Mitt, and my counterarguments to President Obama’s case, are below. But I can sum up why I feel so strongly with this: Barack Obama’s vision for America is inconsistent with that of our founding fathers and our Constitution.

A Limited Government Preserves Freedom

Our government was founded on the principles of self-determination and freedom. Americans were not content to be told by the British government how much they should pay in taxes or what freedoms they were entitled to. So they fought a war to gain their independence. When the founding fathers then set up their own government, at the forefront of their minds was the concern for how to preserve their hard-won freedoms. So they came up with three fundamental ideas about the new federal government: (i) it should be small, split into different branches with checks and balances over each other’s power, (ii) it should share power with, and in fact have less power over citizens’ day-to-day lives than, the states, where the citizens were better represented, and (iii) our most basic freedoms should be enshrined in a Bill of Rights to make absolutely sure the federal government did not violate them. This combination of ideas, they thought, would assure, over time, that the God-given rights they had won back from their government at great cost would be preserved against tyranny.

Obama’s Vision of a Larger Government is Antithetical to Freedom.

In 2008 when Senator Obama talked of “transforming” America and saying “we can do better,” it was clear to me he was talking about fundamentally changing these key principles. He stood for a larger federal government; one that would try and take responsibility for the poor and do more for its citizens. While that may sound nice, having a government undertake that responsibility also means it must become larger, tax more (a government that undertakes to define what’s fair for all its citizens will also try and make everyone pay their “fair share”) and become more involved in our lives, much more involved than the founding fathers intended. A larger government necessarily becomes more difficult to manage, begins to take on a life of its own, and becomes very difficult to control. A larger federal government also means a shift in power from the states, where citizens can more easily control their own destiny. And once people begin to rely on government largesse, cutting the size of that government and its programs, even if the government cannot afford them (witness our overwhelming deficits and the troubles in Europe as it tries to cut back), becomes very, very difficult. People become less willing to give up that security, even if it means a loss of liberty. And they can become accustomed to the idea that the government represents someone else, not them, and that they are owed something by that government (witness appeals from the left that sound like class warfare). As a result, I believe the policies of President Obama reflect a threat to our liberty. Perhaps not immediate. Perhaps only a little. But what he wants to do, at its core, is inconsistent with the intended size and role of our government, which means we will inevitably lose a little, or a lot, of liberty. How much really depends on how much further down Obama’s road we go. And in my view, we’ve already lost too much.

Example: Obamacare.

As an illustration of what I mean, I’ll use Obamacare. It sounds nice to make sure everyone has health insurance. And there are lots of stories of people who can’t afford insurance, and how having it would benefit them greatly. I get that, and I feel for their situation. This is what Obama meant by “we can do better.” He’d like to use government resources to fix these problems. But, just like when you get your first credit card, you need to look beyond the nice things you can buy and decide whether you can really afford it, because that bill will come due at some time. As for the cost in dollars and cents, it’s clear we can’t afford Obamacare. We just can’t. It adds trillions of unfunded government outlays over the next two decades. And once these benefits are offered to citizens it’s very difficult to take them away. In addition, Obamacare has already begun to infringe on our freedoms. At its core it’s the federal government (not the state, which is the principal difference between Obamacare and Romneycare), forcing us to buy a product. Then, because it forces us to buy this product, it must go further and legislate the minimum requirements of this product (or everyone would buy the cheapest version available). That legislation now includes elements some religions find offensive. How’d we get here? By involving the federal government in something it really was never intended by the founding fathers to be involved in: providing health insurance. Further, because the IRS will be in charge of enforcing compliance with the mandate, it will need to know our personal health information. The founders’ vision of limited federal power, with express limits on what the federal government can and can’t do, has been violated by Obamacare. And having the federal government in this position simply poses a threat to our freedom. The founders knew power corrupts, and while we think we can trust the government now, we don’t always know we will be able to. When will it be your religious belief that’s infringed? Or your freedom of speech? This is why the Republicans resist President Obama so much. This is why Obamacare did not get one single Republican vote. This is why Obama’s own budget was rejected by not only Republicans but his own party. And finally this is why Mitch McConnell said it was his goal to make sure Obama only had one term: to try and make sure the damage President Obama does is not long-lasting. Obamacare is a threat to our freedom, and it’s just one example.

This Ain’t Just Rhetoric.

Let me say that this is not just rhetoric. I’m not just making an argument because I want you to vote for Mitt for some other hidden reason. This is why I’m voting for Mitt, and why I honestly believe everyone should. This is what worries me about the prospect of Obama serving another term. He has already made some strides toward “transforming” America into something I believe it was never intended to be. Obamacare was one very large step in that direction. As Vice President Biden said, it was a “[blanking] big deal.” I know the further we go down this road the more difficult it is to go back. I also know the GOP will fight Obama to preserve that liberty, which is likely to result in more gridlock at a time when our government needs to work together. Unfortunately, though, cooperating with the president can mean, and has meant, the loss of some of these liberties, which makes compromise difficult.(more…)

Barbara Johnson and her husband Mark Chapin Johnson are dear friends in California. Barbara is quite the satirist, but her Barbs are quite reflective, insightful and strike a chord that resonates with many Americans. She has a unique perspective on the ‘War on Women’! Enjoy.

Barb’s Barb

Warning! All who are offended easily please be warned the contents of this material are written by a satirist.

What ‘War On Women’?

Yesterday I was feeling nostalgic so I started perusing old black and white family pictures from years gone by. I came across a photo of my mother in her late teens lined up with a group of her girlfriends all wearing miniskirts, shorts or pants in the style of the old Annette Funicello movies at a camp ground. You might say, ‘so what?’ Well, this picture was taken in the late 1950′s in Iran. This is the same country where today a woman at the very least would be arrested for such indecent clothing. You see, I hear every day from our President, while hopping from university to university, preaching about this ‘War on Women’, and I keep looking to see where this war is being waged. I could certainly understand if the opposition candidate was a Rick Santorum type, but it’s Mitt Romney! You know, the moderate from Massachusetts! I guess if you say it often enough it becomes fact and there are plenty of young and impressionable women who believe this guy when he says if he’s not re-elected they would forfeit 50 years of progress. Hmmm! I bet there are a few women in Iran who would jump at the opportunity of by passing Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy and go back to those easy days and I have no doubt there are plenty of women in Egypt that are now considering the option of what it might be like if Barry Obama had stopped supporting the Islamists in their country. It is so very difficult to listen to 20 year old college girls trying to scare someone like me about the perils of a Romney Presidency. The poor girls are so brain washed that most of their cells have turned dormant and refuse to process thought on their own. Somehow, their college professors, the media and all the so called women’s groups reached into this immature casing of hormones and emotion and filled it up with the ultimate Halloween boogie man.

I must say I am not the most tolerant person I know, especially when it comes to low forms of IQ in human form. So, you can just imagine how hard it must be to smile and try to put some sense into a mind of a young girl who has not yet had the opportunity to lift a finger to support herself. She has been fed, clothed and educated throughout the years without a moment of doubt that all will be provided for her. She has a cell phone with internet connection, an assortment of computers, all the cute and cuddly accessories of a college life, most likely in pink, and of course the tiniest little skirts assuring the attention of the opposite sex. She speaks passionately about the terrible possibilities of how we might all end up barefoot and pregnant with men in charge of every aspect of our lives. I listen and listen while she spews the Chicago mob machine’s talking points on how to get women’s votes. I’ve heard it all before. I heard it when a 30 year old female law student testified in front of Congress about how she needed her Catholic University to pay for her contraception. I heard it when all the overpaid starlets of Hollywood spoke at the Democratic National Convention. How does one even approach such an empty vessel? My grandfather used to say the worse curse on the planet is be stuck with dumb person, and here I am. Funny, no one paid for my birth control and somehow I managed, and funny how thirty years ago no one I knew complained about paying for services such as a college education and most of us worked, sometimes, at more than two jobs! It’s funny how we all took pride in our achievements and never expected handouts. In my day it was shameful to be on any form of welfare and that included your parents. Our motto was ‘Hear Me Roar!’ and sadly yours is ‘Give Me More!’

I’m not sure what you think you’re achieving for women these days. If it’s equal pay you should look at the White House for paying its women staff 18% less according to government data. If you’re looking for sexual equality, well, you win, I guess. My only conclusion from your level of whining and expectation is that you truly believe that you are not now, or ever will be; competent enough to take care of yourself and that you would need either your parents or the government to provide for your every whim. My generation fought for the freedom to be responsible for ourselves, to achieve as far as we could or wanted to achieve, to be in charge our destiny. I’m saddened to see your generation is about expectations to have others do for you. Who is enslaved with shackles now, you or me? It is interesting that when it came to voting for a woman to reach the White House more women voted for the good looking younger man. Even Oprah, the queen of women’s issues put aside her life’s work to choose color over gender.

So little girl, I feel sorry for you. Not because there might be a chance any real progress in opportunity for women will be thwarted in the future, but for the lack of pride and individual accomplishment I see in you today. We have had a right leaning Supreme Court for decades and there has been no reversal in any legal choices for women. If you survived the farthest to the right President, such as Bush, I have no doubt you can survive Mitt Romney who has only proven in deeds to be a fair and considerate human being. Frankly, I am horribly offended by your lack of respect for the true achievement my generation and ones before mine allowing you to be an independent individual with the right to choose your own destiny. To see all that hard work and sacrifice be squandered by the agenda of one incompetent political figure and his ability to brainwash you is very sad indeed. My dear, you are selling your soul to be at the mercy of a man after all!

The latest straw man to be set aflame by Democrats in the presidential election is Mitt Romney’s supposed lack of energy for womens’ issues. If anyone shows a lack of energy, showing up for only one of two debates, and frankly only about half the time generally, it’s President Obama. For Barack Obama to ask women rely on him to defend their interests in this election is laughable. So let’s clear the air right now: Mitt Romney stands strongly for equal pay for equal work and workplace opportunity.

Let’s hear first from the woman who knows him best, Ann Romney:

Unfortunately your browser does not support IFrames.

President Obama’s Grand Accomplishment Not That Impressive

In the debate the president’s great claim to advancing women’s’ issues was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which extends the time women can sue for discrimination well after they’ve left their job. While it has a marginal benefit to those women who find out much later they were discriminated against, it has some unintended side effects, such as increasing risk and insurance costs to businesses since they will be subject to suit, well-founded or frivolous, for a much longer period. It also reduces good businesses’ ability to fight frivolous lawsuits, since the relevant witnesses may also be long gone by the time an aggressive trial attorney decides to file suit. It can also result in punishing shareholders of companies who had nothing to do with past discrimination. It was, prior to the Lilly Ledbetter Act, and will remain, whether Mitt Romney or President Obama is elected, against the law to discriminate in pay and workplace advancement. The law President Obama claims as his grand achievement just made it easier to sue, in some ways benefiting the cause of trial lawyers as much as women. Let’s also note this act was signed by President Obama in 2009 and he’s done nothing else of note in the four years since.

Mitt’s Record vs. Democratic Rhetoric

Meanwhile Mitt Romney has a demonstrable record of fighting for women’s rights. When asked in the second debate about his stance on equal pay for equal work, Mitt pointed out he worked to make sure women were equally represented on his cabinet in Massachusetts. He was ranked number one in terms of having women represented in positions of authority. Still the Democrats seized, not upon the substance of his comment or performance, but on his chosen wording, and are trying their best to manufacture an issue out of it. He said he’d had his staff look for qualified women when the applicants came in predominantly male, and they came back, he said, with “binders full of women” qualified for the job. It’s easy enough to understand Mitt was referring to binders full of qualified women’s names and resumes, but that’s just not good enough for Democrats, who clearly aren’t looking out for women’s rights as much as to promote a stereotype of Mitt Romney unencumbered by facts. Kind of like the undeserved stereotypes women have been fighting for years. So I ask, who here is part of the problem versus part of the solution?

I admit my female radar is sometimes deficient, as my cells carry around just one X chromosome. So I realize there are some women’s issues I will not understand as well. I agreed when Ann Romney said in her convention speech that some things are harder on women in ways men do not understand, in particular Obama’s flailing economy that has disproportionately affected women. But I think that trying to turn Mitt’s words into an issue when his actions speak much, much more loudly, insults everyone’s intelligence, and this insult is aimed principally at women. Again my radar may be deficient, but even mine is on alert when hearing this Dem attack. I use as my backup my wife’s comment to me this morning that she couldn’t even stand to watch the news reports of people trying to attack Mitt in this way. Her radar was going off, but not for the reasons the Democrats thought. It’s because they’re trying to make something out of nothing.

But if you still find me hopelessly handicapped by my maleness, let’s also let Mitt’s former lieutenant governor, Kerry Healey, respond:

Taking a cue from the Biden playbook, Barack Obama pulls a face and acts like he’s going to spring from his chair as Mitt Romney makes a point at the presidential debate held at Hofstra University in Hempstead, NY on Oct 16, 2012. (photographer unknown)

The presidential debate action at Hempstead, New York, is in the can…

There were tense moments.

Pundits and politicians will be talking for days about the ‘terrorism’ Libya moment – the one where Obama water carrier moderator Candy CNN Crowley interrupted Mitt Romney to side with Obama by injecting her jaw-dropping version of fact-checker. Cutting off the Governor, she sided with the President on remarks he claimed he made in the Rose Garden the day after the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Obama said he labeled the attacks as “terror” right away. After the Crowley butt-in, Obama then called from way back on his stool for Crowley to repeat her “fact” louder. Turns out, Obama and Crowley have nothing to crow about:

Democratic strategist Joe Trippi later said on FOX News that it looked like “the ref just threw the flag.”

After the debate, Crowley, who repeatedly cut Romney off, and when all was said and done, bequeathed Obama with 3 minutes and 14 seconds more speaking time than the Governor, tried to back off. She conceded that Romney was “right in the main.”

There’s so much I want to say about Ms. Crowley’s moderating, but I’ll constrain myself and just say she made a disgusting hash of it.

Someone else agrees with me:

Candy Crowley did have one good moment: when she addressed “President Romney” #NotAnError

The 82 voters in the town hall setting were chosen by Gallup and Candy Crowley selected the questions. Romney walked into a stacked game but didn’t back down. Voters saw him as someone with strength, leadership, and a common-sense plan to move America forward. Obama was aggressive, pulled a few Biden-style faces, did a lot of bluffing, and threw in some blaming. He offered NO plan.

Yesterday, Gallup polling showed a virtual tie between the two candidates among female voters in battleground states:

Romney – 48%

Obama – 49%

Recent polling from Pew shows a tie with 47% of women preferring Romney and 47% for Obama.

What caused the dramatic change?

For the first time in this presidential campaign, 70 million Americans were able to see Romney WITHOUT MEDIA FILTER at the first presidential debate in Denver, Colorado. Women did not see the monster Obama and his minions have spent millions to portray. What they did see was someone who DID understand their worries and concerns. Romney related to them. They saw a true, competent, understanding leader with decisive plans to improve America, their lives, and with plans to stop the mountain of debt that will be foisted upon their children.

9:06PM EDT October 15, 2012 – WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney leads President Obama by four percentage points among likely voters in the nation’s top battlegrounds, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, and he has growing enthusiasm among women to thank.

As the presidential campaign heads into its final weeks, the survey of voters in 12 crucial swing states finds female voters much more engaged in the election and increasingly concerned about the deficit and debt issues that favor Romney. The Republican nominee has pulled within one point of the president among women who are likely voters, 48%-49%, and leads by 8 points among men.

Team Obama today had a hissy fit out about left-leaning Gallup’s findings and tried to discredit the numbers. Richard Eichenberg, a Tufts University political scientist who is studying gender differences in state-level polling with Elizabeth Robinson, explains why:

“Romney’s improved standing among female voters is likely to cause major consternation among Obama supporters. If Mr. Romney has tied President Obama among women in swing states, then he has likely taken a step toward winning the election.”

(photographer unknown)

Obama’s false meme of a Republican War on Women? Romney has proven that FALSE. He cares deeply about the challenges women face and America’s children. Romney is closing the gender gap.

At tonight’s second presidential debate, expect to hear desperate droning from Obama on abortion and contraception.

Women are awakening to the fact Obama that Obama is stealing their children’s future. They are learning that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan can pull America back from the brink and save the American Dream for their progeny.

In an interview with Piers Morgan, actress Stacey Dash discusses her motivations for endorsing Mitt Romney. She also addresses the horrible treatment she received from many within the Hollywood community as a result of her endorsement.

Thank you Ms. Dash for your endorsement. You are a courageous patriot!

As we progress through October, we wish to acknowledge “Women’s Small Business Month” and to honor women for their contributions to the US economy. Governor Romney believes that economic prosperity and freedom go hand in hand. He recently stated,

Dorothy Price Hill

“The most successful countries shared something in common. They were the freest. They protected the rights of the individual. They enforced the rule of law. And they encouraged free enterprise. They understood that economic freedom is the only force in history that has consistently lifted people out of poverty – and kept people out of poverty.”

With this in mind, we will discuss legislative achievements that have propelled women to be a dynamic and vital part of the US economy. Additionally, we will discuss women-owned businesses from a legislative perspective. Governor Romney will ensure women (including millions of working mothers) continue to thrive and be a vital force in our economy’s recovery and we will identify challenges faced by women owned businesses.

Mary Smith

When considering the Presidential choices before us, it is important to note that past behavior is the greatest predictor of future behavior. In this regard, President Obama is the antithesis of Governor Romney. The current President has expanded government, increased the deficit and proposed higher taxes which would further cripple America small businesses. Since President Obama became President, gas prices have increased, household incomes have fallen and more Americans have sunk into poverty as well as experienced first-time foreclosure of their only home (or have already completed the foreclosure process). Worse yet, he has added over $5 trillion in new debt to our Federal budget deficit and lacks the leadership to bring our government back from the edge of this fiscal cliff. In 2009, small businesses represented 99.7% of all employers in the United States. Think about your local florist, the daycare center and the automobile repair center. These business owners are increasingly concerned about the Federal and State deficits, the burdens of corporate taxes and the Obamacare Federal healthcare mandate.

Quoting Andrea Saul, Governor Romney’s Press Secretary, “Thanks to President Obama’s imaginary recovery, the median earnings for women declined by nearly $1,000. And the poverty rate among women is 16.3% — the highest rate in 17 years.” And as CNN Money stated, “The ‘mancession’ has morphed into the ‘hecovery,’ leaving women workers largely in the dust.” Make no mistake about it — women are worried. And they’re not just worried about themselves — they’re worried about their children’s future. They don’t want them to be saddled with debt from our generation, which has surpassed a record-high $16 trillion. This isn’t the recovery we deserve — and it’s a not a real recovery if it means that women have to take on two or three jobs just to afford to put gas in their cars and food on the table.”

Impromptu meeting October 8, 2012
(Photo credit unknown)

Unlike President Obama, Governor Romney gets it: women drive the US economy. His pro-growth, pro-women plan for a stronger (and rebounding) middle class means more jobs, more take-home pay, and better opportunities. Governor Romney has devoted his entire life since business school and law school supporting successful ventures and advising businesses on transformation. As Governor of Massachusetts, he led by example embracing diversity and seeking the most qualified candidates for his cabinet and executive offices. In Governor Romney’s acceptance speech for the Republican nomination, he stated, “As governor of Massachusetts, I chose a woman lieutenant governor, a woman chief of staff, half of my cabinet and senior officials were women, and in business I mentored and supported great women leaders who went on to run great companies.” His proposals for his Presidency include reducing government spending and creating a business-friendly environment which will provide opportunity for prosperity and success. Without prosperity and success coupled with tackling the budget deficit, future generations of Americans will be doomed.

Legislative Perspective

We will discuss two key pieces of legislation that have positively and profoundly impacted women and the economy. As we embark on this new century, it is important to reflect on the accomplishments that women in business have achieved. On October 25, 1988, Republican President Ronald Reagan signed Public Law (PL) 100-533 “The Women’s Business Ownership Act”. Highlights of this bill included:

Back in 2008, when then-Senator Barack Obama and all his charismatic aura swept onto the national stage as a candidate for President of the United States, he promised a lot of things. Among them, he loudly, proudly, proclaimed he’d bring the USA back to prosperity. Melanie McNamara believed in him. He convinced her. Like many, she voted for him. Three and a half years later, Obama has UNconvinced her.

“In 2008, I voted for Barack Obama. He doesn’t have my vote this time.

Why Mitt Romney? Being a woman, you think about your children and you think about their future. And what I want to think about is a future that has jobs. That our economy’s growing again. That’s important to women and it’s important to me.” – Melanie McNamara

The nearly incomprehensible national debt, over SIXTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS and racing, is a HUGE issue for women. Women are appalled that the back-breaking, crippling, immoral national debt will fall upon the young shoulders of the ones they sacrifice so much for – their children. The next generation will absolutely be clobbered with the crushing responsibility to repay the massive dollars borrowed and squandered by crony-concerned, devil-may-care, back-slapping, unaccountable politicians on Capitol Hill. Obama is chief among them. He’s recklessly added more debt than the first 41 presidents combined.

Let’s take a stroll down memory lane…

Back in 2008, when Obama was finagling for the presidency, he ecstatically pinned the ‘unpatriotic, irresponsible’ label on President George W. Bush for his enlargement of the national debt:

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.“ – Barack Obama, July 3, 2008

Once ensconced in the Oval Office, Obama put on his heretofore unknown amnesia hat; you know, the one that conveniently makes him forget his promises and do the complete opposite of what he pledged. He couldn’t wait to get his redistributive hands on Uncle Sam’s credit card. Obama couldn’t spend (and waste) fast enough – roughly $6 trillion in 3.5 years.

…[E]very “man, woman and child” now owes over $51,000. Obama’s unanimously-rejected budget would explodes that debt by $11 trillion …(more!) over the next decade. So much for his promises to thoroughly examine federal spending “line by line” to achieve a “net spending cut” while slicing the deficit in half by now. It’s almost as if he just says whatever he thinks will help get him elected, then does whatever he pleases once in office. This must stop. Mitt Romney’s new television ad, entitled “Dear Daughter,” makes the issue of inter-generational theft and reckless government spending very personal:

And, what have Obama’s policies done for women? Another ad from Team Romney/Ryan:

Obama’s policies are making it harder on women.

The poverty rate for women is the highest it has been in 17 years.

Over 5.5 million women are unemployed and their individual share of debt is over $50,000.

Fellow Americans, if you truly care about your children’s future, you must reject Barack Obama and Joe Biden. It’s okay to let them go. Don’t let them continue to steal the future from America’s children. You must vote for the two men who know how to get our economy going again, with rising salaries, and who will work with all their might to lower, not increase, our national debt.

“This is going to be an economic election… The people that have been hurt the most by this economy have been women. They have higher unemployment rates than men. There are more women going into poverty – since the last 40 years.” – Ann Romney

Ann reassured listeners that Governor Romney “gets it”. He will focus on restoring jobs and better paying jobs for women and Americans, and he’ll tackle America’s deficit woes so the unthinkable won’t happen – forcing America’s children and grandchildren to pay for our current outrageous, wasteful excesses.

If you missed Ann’s wonderful, engaging speech on September 5th at the ‘Women for Mitt’ rally in Findlay, Ohio have a listen here.

FINDLAY — Ann Romney fired back Wednesday at critics who have accused husband Mitt Romney of being out of touch with average Americans, saying her own bout with multiple sclerosis taught the family what it means to suffer and lose hope.

“When people say that we’ve led a charmed life and we don’t relate to people that are having trouble, I want to remind you that I’ve been in a very dark place, and I know what it is like to have no hope,” Mrs. Romney said at a rally for women supporting her husband, the Republican presidential candidate, at the University of Findlay in Ohio. “So believe me when I tell you these words: We are there for you because we know what it feels like.”
…

She described her struggle with the disease, which coincided with her family’s move to Utah so her husband could oversee preparations for the 2002 Winter Olympics there. She said she lost the use of her right side and had problems getting out of bed, but said that despite initial second thoughts the move turned out well.

“Sometimes when you take a risk like that and you just go and do what you know is the right thing to do, sometimes God looks over you,” she said.

Mrs. Romney has been in remission for years.

I’m telling you, the woman has a gift. Ann speaks with such friendly ease one doesn’t want her to stop.

President Obama believes he has the women vote all boxed in. Well, women across America are banding together for grassroots work in their urgency to elect Mitt Romney as President. Just below is one women’s group and their statement from the “About” button of Women for Romney 2012. Below the statement is a great video they just released. The video is great! I love their choice of music too…

Women for Romney 2012 is a national grassroots women’s coalition supporting Mitt Romney for President in 2012. We were initially formed as a group on Facebook and we invite you to “like” our page and join our group for robust discussion with opinionated ladies. We also post event dates, volunteer opportunities, campaign information, and inspiration for our growing national women’s coalition dedicated to putting Ann & Mitt Romney in the White House and putting America back on the path to prosperity and pride. Please join our group at: Facebook Group. The women’s vote matters in this election. We want to know what you think, feel and believe!

Women for Romney 2012 was started by Gina Covell Maddox (@GinaCMaddox) and a small but dedicated group of well-informed politically savvy women. Over 800+members strong, we are a national grass-roots organization. We are NOT connected to the Mitt Romney for President Campaign or any PAC.